Room Treatment to get Soundstage, Spaciousness & Imaging?

[Cote Dazur]

It’s actually pretty easy when you think about it.

To hear more of the depth in a recording, the only information that can bring you more of that is the direct sound from loudspeakers, as that is the only thing that contains the information about the acoustic depth of the recorded space. You simply need a high ratio of direct sound compared to the reflective sounds coming from your own listening environment, as those reflections can only "blur" the recorded information, especially the finer details like the acoustics of the recorded space.

Yes, but in my experience you also need space behind the speakers, the more the better, in other word pull them into the room.

 

[Grimoire]

Yes, but in my experience you also need space behind the speakers, the more the better, in other word pull them into the room.

That's very far from being my experience.

 

[goat76]

Yes, but in my experience you also need space behind the speakers, the more the better, in other word pull them into the room.

I do have my speakers about 1 meter from the wall behind them, but the main reason is that I think the overall sound is more balanced in that position, and I have actually never listened to what that does to the perceived depth in particular.

Some people, like you, obviously have the experience that a lot of space is needed to hear depth in the recording, while others, like @Sigberg Audio and @Grimoire, don't have the same experience. This makes me suspect that it may be more than one sense in play here, and maybe the visual aspect of just seeing the wall further away may add to the sense of more depth?

Another thing that makes me question the importance of a large distance to the wall is that the dominating part of the frequencies isn't omnidirectional except the lowest bass frequencies, and as the sound aspect of the perceived depth of the recorded space can only come with the direct sound path from the loudspeakers to the listener's ears, the distance to the wall behind the speakers should probably not be as important as any of us may think it is.

Anyway, I still think other sound aspects will gain from keeping the loudspeakers away from most boundaries, and letting them "breathe" with less interference. But I can't see how the perceived depth can come from anything other than a "clean" direct sound, or visual "trickery" of seeing the wall further away behind the loudspeakers. Sometimes I think I may hear more depth in some recordings if I listen with my eyes closed, which may indicate that otherwise seeing the wall just 1 meter behind the speakers sometimes reduces the actual depth of the recordings.
I wonder what a 3D-illusion painting would do to the sense of perceived depth if it were placed on the full wall behind the loudspeakers.

 

[Grimoire]

I wonder what a 3D-illusion painting would do to the sense of perceived depth if it were placed on the full wall behind the loudspeakers.

Or just a TV showing wide open spaces...

 

[Cote Dazur]

maybe the visual aspect of just seeing the wall further away may add to the sense of more depth?

To me their is no doubt that it is a big part of it, for few reasons in light of what I experience when listening to my 2 systems.
if I close my eyes the perceived depth changes.
I perceive more depth in the bigger listening room, but the sound never goes further than where the walls are, in neither of my two rooms. it is also true for width.
Listening in very little light but not obscurity help also with the illusion of depth.

So yes vision, in my opinion is a key factor.
In my big room, I use the back wall as a screen with my projector, but when watching a video or movie, even dough I still listen in stereo, the illusion of depth is quasi inexistent. To me, the 3 dimensional aspect of stereo is a key factor of interest in listening to music that way.
This morning, as I was listening to the great record recommandation from @Sigberg Audio , some pieces, in the way they were recorded, were like jet fuel for my music system, not spectacular or tacky, they sounded just right and dimensionaly correct, not like being there, but realistic, as when watching a nicely filmed scene on TV, you know you are not there, but it looks very real.

 

[Cinema40]

I've experimented with listening positions and furniture placement based on forum suggestions, and here's what I've learned -
1. Soundstage width improved noticeably when I removed the curtains and rockwool panels from the side wall. I tested this using the materials @Sigberg Audio recommended, and the difference in panning was clear—more reflective surfaces genuinely do expand the soundstage.
2. On-axis speaker positioning gave me the best results for imaging and instrument placement.
3. Moving the speakers 2 feet from the back wall enhanced depth significantly. The sound now feels like it's coming from behind the speakers rather than from the front wall itself, which is a much better stereo effect.
One thing I noticed: the rockwool panels absorbed more sound than the curtain wall, which caused the stereo image to shift toward the right for some reason. That was unexpected. I also noticed that with Dirac running, and the stereo image sits noticeably lower in height compared to running without EQ. I'm not sure why that happens—if someone can explain this and suggest how to recover or just increase the overall height from which sound is produced, I'd appreciate it.

Then I experimented with an equilateral triangle setup using a low-back chair to minimize reflections, and it was by far the best listening experience I've had with these speakers. A few songs lacked bass without the subs running, but once I integrate them properly, this will be the ideal configuration. The downside is that it's impractical to maintain long-term given my room layout.

But I'm confident now—I know what sound I'm chasing in my room.

 

[SigbergAudio]

I do have my speakers about 1 meter from the wall behind them, but the main reason is that I think the overall sound is more balanced in that position, and I have actually never listened to what that does to the perceived depth in particular.

Some people, like you, obviously have the experience that a lot of space is needed to hear depth in the recording, while others, like @Sigberg Audio and @Grimoire, don't have the same experience. This makes me suspect that it may be more than one sense in play here, and maybe the visual aspect of just seeing the wall further away may add to the sense of more depth?

Another thing that makes me question the importance of a large distance to the wall is that the dominating part of the frequencies isn't omnidirectional except the lowest bass frequencies, and as the sound aspect of the perceived depth of the recorded space can only come with the direct sound path from the loudspeakers to the listener's ears, the distance to the wall behind the speakers should probably not be as important as any of us may think it is.

Anyway, I still think other sound aspects will gain from keeping the loudspeakers away from most boundaries, and letting them "breathe" with less interference. But I can't see how the perceived depth can come from anything other than a "clean" direct sound, or visual "trickery" of seeing the wall further away behind the loudspeakers. Sometimes I think I may hear more depth in some recordings if I listen with my eyes closed, which may indicate that otherwise seeing the wall just 1 meter behind the speakers sometimes reduces the actual depth of the recordings.
I wonder what a 3D-illusion painting would do to the sense of perceived depth if it were placed on the full wall behind the loudspeakers.

As I have mentioned in some other threads on this topic, I think the largest contributor to the.. perhaps not myth, but at least exaggerated belief that speakers need to be far away from the front wall is the following:

The main contributor to the improved experience isn't the distance between speakers and wall, it's the distance between the speakers and the listener. A number of things will improve if you sit closer to the speakers. What happens when you move the speakers further from the wall? They come closer to you. My theory is that for many of those who have experienced the benefit of moving the speakers out, the same experience could be had by moving the listening position closer to the speakers. The depth-is-improved-experience is in part a result of cleaner, more direct sound, and in part your brain imagining it due to visual cues.

Which alternative (moving yourself or the speakers) is most practical to you will vary from room to room of course. And for some living room situations you can't do either, as you need to have the speakers close to the wall, and you need your sofa close to the opposite wall.

 

[SigbergAudio]

I've experimented with listening positions and furniture placement based on forum suggestions, and here's what I've learned -
1. Soundstage width improved noticeably when I removed the curtains and rockwool panels from the side wall. I tested this using the materials @Sigberg Audio recommended, and the difference in panning was clear—more reflective surfaces genuinely do expand the soundstage.
2. On-axis speaker positioning gave me the best results for imaging and instrument placement.
3. Moving the speakers 2 feet from the back wall enhanced depth significantly. The sound now feels like it's coming from behind the speakers rather than from the front wall itself, which is a much better stereo effect.
One thing I noticed: the rockwool panels absorbed more sound than the curtain wall, which caused the stereo image to shift toward the right for some reason. That was unexpected. I also noticed that with Dirac running, and the stereo image sits noticeably lower in height compared to running without EQ. I'm not sure why that happens—if someone can explain this and suggest how to recover or just increase the overall height from which sound is produced, I'd appreciate it.

Then I experimented with an equilateral triangle setup using a low-back chair to minimize reflections, and it was by far the best listening experience I've had with these speakers. A few songs lacked bass without the subs running, but once I integrate them properly, this will be the ideal configuration. The downside is that it's impractical to maintain long-term given my room layout.

But I'm confident now—I know what sound I'm chasing in my room.

View attachment 548530View attachment 548531

I see no real reason from your pictures why you can't move your sofa section further into the room (closer to the speakers)?

 

[Cote Dazur]

But I'm confident now—I know what sound I'm chasing in my room.

Glad to read this, I am happy for you.

The downside is that it's impractical to maintain long-term given my room layout.

Thank you for sharing those pictures, that, to me, looks perfectly natural in a listening room. Give it time, I remember, when I went that way it felt a little wierd, odd, at first, but now what looks odd, misplaced to me is this.

To me this is a Home theatre layout, for stereo, the other pictures layout, is their natural habitat.

 

[youngho]

I've experimented with listening positions and furniture placement based on forum suggestions, and here's what I've learned -
1. Soundstage width improved noticeably when I removed the curtains and rockwool panels from the side wall. I tested this using the materials @Sigberg Audio recommended, and the difference in panning was clear—more reflective surfaces genuinely do expand the soundstage.
2. On-axis speaker positioning gave me the best results for imaging and instrument placement.
3. Moving the speakers 2 feet from the back wall enhanced depth significantly. The sound now feels like it's coming from behind the speakers rather than from the front wall itself, which is a much better stereo effect.
One thing I noticed: the rockwool panels absorbed more sound than the curtain wall, which caused the stereo image to shift toward the right for some reason. That was unexpected. I also noticed that with Dirac running, and the stereo image sits noticeably lower in height compared to running without EQ. I'm not sure why that happens—if someone can explain this and suggest how to recover or just increase the overall height from which sound is produced, I'd appreciate it.

Then I experimented with an equilateral triangle setup using a low-back chair to minimize reflections, and it was by far the best listening experience I've had with these speakers. A few songs lacked bass without the subs running, but once I integrate them properly, this will be the ideal configuration. The downside is that it's impractical to maintain long-term given my room layout.

But I'm confident now—I know what sound I'm chasing in my room.
View attachment 548530View attachment 548531

Hi, sounds like you're on the path to increased satisfaction and you've found your advice gurus. Just wondering or commenting:

1. Soundstage width vs imaging between the speakers?
2. Makes sense. I had previously looked for measurements in your speakers' family and found this for the bigger sibling: https://www.stereophile.com/content/focal-aria-936-loudspeaker-measurements
3. I would suggest picking two compromise settings, one for individual music listening and another for home cinema (put painters' tape on the floor to help identify two different speaker positions, and if possible, set up two or more separate Dirac corrections).
4. Sounds to me like you should reconsider your seating arrangement and setup, also rear wall absorption. Not sure you've addressed early vertical reflections adequately but maybe perceived the effects of posterior ones.

Best of luck!

 

[Cinema40]

I see no real reason from your pictures why you can't move your sofa section further into the room (closer to the speakers)?

The Side Surrounds get pushed quite far back atleast in the current orientation. I will see if there's scope to push the listening position more to the front.

Hi, sounds like you're on the path to increased satisfaction and you've found your advice gurus. Just wondering or commenting:

1. Soundstage width vs imaging between the speakers?
3. I would suggest picking two compromise settings, one for individual music listening and another for home cinema (put painters' tape on the floor to help identify two different speaker positions, and if possible, set up two or more separate Dirac corrections).
4. Sounds to me like you should reconsider your seating arrangement and setup, also rear wall absorption. Not sure you've addressed early vertical reflections adequately but maybe perceived the effects of posterior ones.

Best of luck!

1.The added soundstage width did not mess with the stereo image which was still quite sharp, Just more spread out between instruments.
2. Yes, I am running a less steep 4 db curve for my music listening.
3. Rear wall absorption is on it's way out. I have space for floor to ceiling 2' x 2' corner bass traps in the rear corners and the remaining wall will be a mix of diffusion and reflection. I am considering getting ceiling absorption by using acoustic clouds of 6 to 10 inch depth but am concerned that it will over dampen the room.

 

[napfkuchen]

Maybe this happens with these thin foam like abosrption. I use different panels with a depth of 10, 15 and 40 cm and I really like how the sound in the room turned out and clearly hear (and measured) how the decay times were shortened.

+1. My panels have a depth of 10 cm (4x 30x120, 3x 50x150 and 2x 40x40) and 40 cm (8x 40x100) in a small room (14,5m²). Especially the bigger absorbers in the corners and at the back wall / ceiling brought the reverberation time down to a corridor between 200–300 ms across the frequency range measured by GLM, starting at 63 Hz. The GRADE reports clearly show that room calibration cannot work miracles. I would rate GLM 3/10 and the room acoustic treatments 9/10 in this regard. Of course, this depends heavily on the room's proportions and size.